Bored, probably not original, but oh well, late as
night, seems like good entertainment for me to watch
it get eaten alive:
1. The law of noncontradiction states that there must
be no contradictions because a contradiction implies
everything, and we do not perceive everything to be
2. Amidst that implied everything would necessarily be
3. This indicates that the LNC is indeterminable.
4. Which means that there could exist possible worlds
where it doesn't operate without everything being
apparently the case.
5. But it also means that within that field of things
which have been infinitely implied, there must exist
some statement, "The LNC is universal and tautologous"
which is necessarily correct.
6. But that would be a contradiction, because for it
to come about, there must exist some area of
nonuniversality where the LNC is not a tautology.
7. Which wouldn't matter in the case of it not
mattering- but would imply that the contradiction
existed through every possible world.
8. Further, as far as I can tell, there's no possible
way to tell the difference between a reality which is
reasonable and logical and self contained/consistent
constructed as a necessity within an infinite scope of
variety, and a world that exists because it is
reasonable and self-consistent and follows the rules
of formal reasoning.
The following film may be unsuitable for older audiences, and has been rated G for content.
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Shopping - Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:50:30 MDT